I have had discussions with race organizers at times that seemed as though might verge on becoming an argument as I attempted to explain how a course design with a fixed and contiguous start/finish requires an out-and-back section. I surmise that it is unique to people in our profession to encounter this type of misunderstanding. We are accustomed to dealing with course designs, while the average non-professional is not.
I have had some luck proposing the RD visualize a loop of string that is 5K/10K whatever long, with a section of this loop pinned to the S/F position. I then ask them, how would you propose to make the rest of this loop fit neatly into available streets? Sometimes, using this metaphor still does not cut it for him/her.
When the start/finish is on an out-and-back section ("lollipop" configuration) and we have flexibility to move the contiguous start/finish up or back, I usually am able to get an understanding of why the S/F must float. When I do not have that flexibility, I sometimes struggle to get the RD to grasp why an out-and-back section is necessary. A couple of clients have actually told me I was wrong when I tried to explain how this works. I am guessing that I am not the only one out here who experiences this type of discussion.
I sometimes spend a non-trivial amount of time on the phone with race organizers discussing course design because of the lack of understanding of things we think of as basic. For example, in a recent discussion about a labyrinthine design proposal, I insisted the RD get on Google Maps so we could view the proposed streets and paths simultaneously. She kept using "go straight", "go around", "go down", etc. to attempt to guide me. when I asked her to use compass directions, she did not understand how to. I had to explain where north is, then west, east, south. She still struggled, sometimes getting her directions backwards. What should have been a 10 or 15-minute discussion lasted almost 45 minutes before we got on the same page. This is a person with an advanced degree, who I consider highly intelligent. When I grasped her design concept, I realized it was weirdly and unnecessarily complicated. I estimated this 5K would require at least 14 course marshals and a lot of backup course markings.
Five minutes later, I proposed a much simpler design, to which she said "OK". If I had just measured what she gave me, I would venture the race wold have ended up looking more like a hash run than a 5K race. A perennial issue I encounter with course design and measurement and course logistics management in general is that this all seems simple to the uninitiated. Bob Thurston can vouch for the challenges I recently faced attempting to add the right amount of distance in a large open parking lot for a fixed/contiguous S/F 10K. Thanks to Bob donating his time and his math skills, and my work riding and rejecting multiple parking lot section measurements, I was finally able to cobble together a moderately-intuitive route. This took several hours. The RD will never understand how it took so long.
I would appreciate hearing how any of us has successfully dealt with this sort of situation.